HALIFAX, Nova Scotia — A controversial U.S.-crafted peace proposal aimed at ending the Russia-Ukraine conflict has drawn sharp criticism from American senators, who describe it as heavily favoring Russian interests and tantamount to a “wish list” for Kremlin leader Vladimir Putin. The plan, developed under former President Donald Trump’s administration with input from Senator Marco Rubio and a Trump envoy, has been widely rejected by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and condemned by prominent U.S. lawmakers.
The peace initiative, leaked publicly as a 28-point framework, reportedly emerged from intense negotiations involving Trump and Kremlin officials but notably excluded Kiev from the drafting process. Senator Rubio reportedly acknowledged to colleagues that the plan aligns closely with Russian demands rather than reflecting a balanced U.S. position, a claim Rubio later disputed publicly. However, the tune among several senators remains critical.
Democratic Senator Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, called the plan “an outrage,” emphasizing that it was “very clearly written by Putin and Russia for what they want to see.” She lambasted Trump’s claim to be a savvy dealmaker, accusing him of allowing Putin to manipulate U.S. policy for nearly a year. “It’s a travesty on both the American and Ukrainian peoples,” Shaheen said.
Republican voices echoed the alarm. Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina called it one of the “most serious geopolitical mistakes” of his lifetime. He condemned any proposal that might embolden Putin, labeling him “a murderer, a rapist, and an assassin,” and criticized the plan for effectively rewarding Russian aggression. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell also cautioned that the plan seemed to be an attempt to appease Putin, undermining Ukraine’s sovereignty and security.
President Zelenskyy, while not outright rejecting the plan, stressed the need for fairness and caution in addressing what he described as “truly one of the most difficult moments in our history.” Meanwhile, Putin appeared to welcome the proposal, stating it “could form the basis of a final peace settlement” if the U.S. and European allies convinced Ukraine to agree.
The peace proposal’s leak has sparked intensive debate and skepticism in international and U.S. political circles, especially at the Halifax International Security Forum, where about 300 military officials, diplomats, senators, and scholarly experts convene annually to discuss global security issues. Notably, the Trump administration had suspended participation of U.S. defense officials in several think tank events, including this forum, highlighting a divergence within U.S. foreign policy institutions.
The plan would require Kyiv to concede significant territory to Russia—territories Ukraine has steadfastly refused to cede despite the ongoing conflict. This aspect further fuels accusations that the initiative undermines Ukraine’s constitutional integrity and serves Russian geopolitical aims.
As of now, Ukrainian officials have until Thursday to respond to the plan, indicating a critical juncture in the trajectory of the war and diplomatic efforts. U.S. senators continue to express concern that accepting the plan would sign away Ukraine’s hard-fought sovereignty for a negotiation heavily skewed towards Russian demands.
This growing bipartisan discontent suggests that the Trump-backed peace proposal is unlikely to gain broad support in Washington or Kyiv, with many viewing it as a dangerous attempt at premature appeasement of an aggressive authoritarian regime.